English

A Pragmatic Guide to Geoparsing Evaluation

Computation and Language 2019-09-17 v5

Abstract

Empirical methods in geoparsing have thus far lacked a standard evaluation framework describing the task, metrics and data used to compare state-of-the-art systems. Evaluation is further made inconsistent, even unrepresentative of real-world usage by the lack of distinction between the different types of toponyms, which necessitates new guidelines, a consolidation of metrics and a detailed toponym taxonomy with implications for Named Entity Recognition (NER) and beyond. To address these deficiencies, our manuscript introduces a new framework in three parts. Part 1) Task Definition: clarified via corpus linguistic analysis proposing a fine-grained Pragmatic Taxonomy of Toponyms. Part 2) Metrics: discussed and reviewed for a rigorous evaluation including recommendations for NER/Geoparsing practitioners. Part 3) Evaluation Data: shared via a new dataset called GeoWebNews to provide test/train examples and enable immediate use of our contributions. In addition to fine-grained Geotagging and Toponym Resolution (Geocoding), this dataset is also suitable for prototyping and evaluating machine learning NLP models.

Keywords

Cite

@article{arxiv.1810.12368,
  title  = {A Pragmatic Guide to Geoparsing Evaluation},
  author = {Milan Gritta and Mohammad Taher Pilehvar and Nigel Collier},
  journal= {arXiv preprint arXiv:1810.12368},
  year   = {2019}
}

Comments

Accepted at Language Resources and Evaluation (Springer Journal)

R2 v1 2026-06-23T04:56:39.762Z